The Supreme Court has been asked to take a case that could deal a crippling blow to the labor movement.
Entering military conflicts without a declaration of war from Congress isn't unconstitutional—but legislators must step forward and set limits and objectives.
Those who deny the science of vaccinations are shirking a duty of citizenship.
In King v. Burwell, the Supreme Court has a chance to misconstrue the text of a statute its majority despises. It shouldn’t.
Unless the Supreme Court firmly declares that gay couples deserve equal protection, it risks encouraging state-level obstruction.
Disparate-impact claims have a long record of opening doors in employment, education, voting, and housing. Conservatives want to bury them.
If the Supreme Court requires states to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, then it cannot allow states to refuse to celebrate such marriages themselves.
This Supreme Court has shown a tremendous capacity to surprise.
Sheltered in their bubble, the Justices will decide whether states can keep their judges from putting the arm on donors.
The Supreme Court is slowly changing the meaning of words in free-speech law—and not for the better.
It's the Bush-Obama record of surveillance and lack of accountability—and not executive action on immigration—that ought to concern citizens.
On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that police stops are legal when the officer has a "reasonable suspicion" that a law is being broken—even if that law doesn't exist.
Al Smith's stand against the power of the state eventually led to new laws protecting an ancient Indian faith.
Many people don't know where courts draw the line on what constitutes free speech—or what they mean by a "true threat."
We can't call it a constitutional crisis; but we shouldn't consider it business as usual, either.
Watching the battle between Obama and a Republican Congress for two years may shake Americans' faith in the Framers.
In upholding same-sex-marriage bans, Sixth Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton said the people should decide, but his ruling virtually guaranteed the opposite.
A Supreme Court case over whether passports for people born in Jerusalem should read "Israel" or not could have a surprisingly big effect on the balance of power in the United States.
... According to the law.
Once, the chief justice said the only way to stop discriminating on race was to stop discrimination on race. Now his tune isn't so clear.